A Swedish lawyer representing two women whose allegations triggered a sexual-misconduct investigation of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has given [Newsweek column] Declassified the first on-the-record confirmation of the allegations that led to the issuance—and then rapid cancellation—of a warrant on a rape charge and to a parallel investigation into alleged “molestation." Claes Borgstrom of the Stockholm law firm Borgstrom and Bostrom, who is representing two women who said they had sexual relationships with Assange, said his clients complained to the police of Assange's reluctance to use condoms and unwillingness to be tested for sexually transmitted disease.

***

Borgstrom said that specific details about the the allegations had not yet appeared in Swedish media. But he acknowledged that the principal concern the women had about Assange’s behavior—which they reported to police in person—related to his lack of interest in using condoms and his refusal to undergo testing, at the women’s request, for sexually transmitted disease. A detailed, chronological account of the women’s alleged encounters with Assange—which in both cases began with consensual sexual contact but later included what the women claimed was nonconsensual sex, in which Assange didn’t use a condom—was published on Tuesday by The Guardian; a Declassified item included a more explicit reference than The Guardian to Assange’s declining to submit to medical tests.

'When they got back they had sexual relations, but there was a problem with the condom - it had split.

'She seemed to think that he had done this deliberately but he insisted that it was an accident.’

Whatever her views about the incident, she appeared relaxed and untroubled at the seminar the next day where Assange met Woman B, another pretty blonde, also in her 20s, but younger than Woman A.

***

The [second] woman admitted trying to engage her hero in conversation.

Assange seemed pleased to have such an ardent admirer fawning over him and, she said, would look at her ‘now and then’. Eventually he took a closer interest.

***

What he did not tell her was that the party was being hosted by the woman he had slept with two nights before and whose bed he would probably be sleeping in that night.

***

‘The passion and attraction seemed to have disappeared,’ she said.

Most of what then followed has been blacked out in her statement, except for: ‘It felt boring and like an everyday thing.’

One source close to the investigation said the woman had insisted he wear a condom, but the following morning he made love to her without one.

This was the basis for the rape charge. But after the event she seemed unruffled enough to go out to buy food for his breakfast.

Today, a former attorney for Assange - James D. Catlin - has confirmed that the charges are for having sex without using a condom. He notes that:

The consent of both women to sex with Assange has been confirmed by prosecutors.

He also accuses the prosecutors of "making it up as they go along", and said that Sweden's justice system is destined to become "the laughingstock of the world" for pursuing the case against Assange.

And Assange's current London attorney - Mark Stephens - told AOL news that he doesn't even know what the charges against Assange are, but that they are not rape:

Stephens, told AOL News today that Swedish prosecutors told him that Assange is wanted not for allegations of rape, as previously reported, but for something called "sex by surprise," which he said involves a fine of 5,000 kronor or about $715.

***

"We don't even know what 'sex by surprise' even means, and they haven't told us," Stephens said, just hours after Sweden's Supreme Court rejected Assange's bid to prevent an arrest order from being issued against him on allegations of sex crimes.

"Whatever 'sex by surprise' is, it's only a offense in Sweden -- not in the U.K. or the U.S. or even Ibiza," Stephens said. "I feel as if I'm in a surreal Swedish movie being threatened by bizarre trolls. The prosecutor has not asked to see Julian, never asked to interview him, and he hasn't been charged with anything. He's been told he's wanted for questioning, but he doesn't know the nature of the allegations against him."

The strange tale of Assange's brief flings with two Swedish women during a three-day period in mid-August -- and decisions by three different prosecutors to first dismiss rape allegations made by the women and then re-open the case -- has more twists, turns and conspiracy theories than any of [Swedish novelist] Stieg Larsson's best-sellers.

So Assange might be a cad for sleeping with 2 women within a couple of days, and he might be irresponsible for having sex without a condom and then failing to submit to HIV tests afterwards.

But he has not been accused of rape under any traditional meaning of that term.

Tuesday, international police agency Interpol said it had issued a "red notice" which allows arrest warrants issued by national police authorities to be circulated to other countries to facilitate arrests and help possible extradition.

"There is no arrest warrant against him. There was an Interpol red notice, which is not a warrant, alerting authorities to monitor his movements," Stephens told Reuters.

***

"We are in this position where we have never been told what the allegations are against him, we do know that he hasn't been charged, we do know that he has only been asked for as a witness," he said.

"We know that ... the offence is one of 'sex by surprise', which is not an offence known in England. He has not been given the evidence against him."

Stephens said Assange was willing to meet Swedish prosecutors but they did not want to meet him.

"We are in a very, very surreal situation at the moment it's like a Swedish fairytale."

You can catch a whopping yeast infection from a toilet seat and hundreds of millions do -every year.

You can catch all-manner of disease-things from a toilet seat. For that matter, it may be more obvious that you can catch all manner of disease-things at your doctor's office too.

Life is unforgiving. And doctors are filthy liars.

Having sex with a large number of partners in a lifetime -is exactly like lying naked on your back -with your mouth open -in a toilet stall -at a McDonald's restaurant -in some busy inner-city location -for a week or two -every time you expand your sexual conquest.

You are simply asking for it.

Everyone is clearly out of my league or the league of anyone I want to snuggle up close to -except my wife.

Now, -looking-... I'm with you there. There's no good reason to stop looking -that I'm aware.

-Looking in a lifetime- is like the sweet cream of the cows who have fed on the first clover of Spring.

But there's no reason to look at pictures of the cows to try and imagine the cream.

That's just a waste of time, and there's little enough of that -as it is-.

Sean, a woman can sleep with a man three times in a day, but if the third time she said no and the sex was nonconsensual, it was surely rape!

Consent to sex can be withdrawn at any point. A woman who previously had sex with a man can decide that she no longer wants to for any reason whatsoever, including if the man refuses to use a condom, an nonconsensual sex in any context is RAPE.

> A woman who "sleeps" with a man several "times" in one day can't claim 1 of those times was "rape"

Maybe some of you have not, but I'm a big fan of Wikileaks and I've been following this for some time. If you want a 'pro' assessment go to groklaw and read the forums there. IMHO the guy hasn't done a damn thing, and he was already aware that someone was going to try to pin a false sex crime on him at some point -at least according to his own lawyer. These allegations are about as fishy as the inside of a fish.

WHAT he did isn't really the question. WHO wants him, and the fact that the USA isn't above assassinating people in ANY way they can, is why he's hiding. America isn't known for being patient, intelligent, or forgiving - even to her allies.

I hope he can keep on hiding. The huge crushing political power wheel wants him for no other reason than to put him out of commission in any way they can . . . along with his site Wikileaks -- no question! It's all about as transparent as cellophane. Interpol involved in a -- he said she said unsubstantiated and obviously fishy rape case? Wikileaks is about providing hidden uncomfortable truths to the public. I always believed 'veritas vincinte' -- Truth will Conquer -- but in this day an age there is so much corruption well we'll just have to wait and see.

What I find very interesting about the whole Swedish debacle and the 'sex by surprise' charges is that...wait, isn't this the same country that allowed an Egyptian seeking asylum to be 'extraordinarily renditioned' by CIA operatives? (http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2006/11/09/sweden-violated-torture-ban-cia-rendition)

Actually, this part is the funniest:"...and the two apparently had a conversation in which it became clear they had both had sex with Assange. The photographer was worried about having had unprotected sex and decided she wanted to go to the police."

The two women talked and were so worried about the lack of condoms that they went to the police?

I beg you to go to your local police station and ask the cop on service if this is possible.After he finishes laughing, feel free to report back to us.

I think after this whole story winds down, we wont be getting any US windbags droning about free speech in China.If some chinese dissident released internal chinese memos like this, you can bet the chinese would be working triple time to shut everything down like the 'free and democratic' countries are doing now.Wed have all that hollow breast beating about how the democracy this and that... simply because it would incommodate the chinese.

Then again, I saw in my lifetime the US govt go after Bobby Fischer because he played a chess game.He was forced in exile and died on some northern island because his government decided that a chess embargo was a serious crime. A terrorist like Luis Posada Carriles on the other hand... no problem.

So no, after the Fischer affair, Im not surprised by anything.

Now lets see our 'brave' and shallow artist community come to Wikileaks defense.

Yeah... I thought so.It took 5 years for any of them to stand up to Bush like the Dixie Chickes did... I dont see any of the made for measure activists speaking about this.Well, Charlie Sheen will....

When the United States government has a hissy fit, any charge is possible. It's ridiculous to think that they can create any crime in order to justify an arrest.How about the US government look inward, to figure out why their employees are so angry, frustrate and hell bent on exposing cables?This finally confirms the fantasy of freedom of speech in America.

This Swedish Rape law is almost as Draconian as India's Divorce Law which is Criminal law, IPC 498a, plus the Domestic Violence law, and IPC 125 for Alimony also comes under Criminal law. Why you might ask is Family law under Criminal law, go to my blog to find out this and other International articles and more.

Last time i was in Sweden i had almost a surprise sex in a bar when 2 girls wanted to have sex with me and when i said no ( i mean WTF ??? ) they just invited me to meet their friends to see if it is possible to have sex with them

Trust me in this country if you don't get laid in the 5 minutes you lay your foot in a bar their is something very wrong with you

Someone mentioned Orwell's 1984. Well ifAmericans can no longer access the Wikileaks site through the usual servers, how is the US gov different from China?

I am certainly opposed to exploiting women but to persecute and extradite Assange because he didn't use a condom during sex when these same countries harbored Roman Polanski although he was indicted for performing various forms of rape upon a thirteen year old girl is nothing short of hypocrisy and clearly politically motivated.

This post is just full of misconceptions about Swedish law. There is no law against "surprise sex" or sex without a condom in Sweden (well, if the latter was true, how do you think we reproduce....?)

The Swedish laws against rape is somewhat stricter than in most other countries, since all sex that is not consensual is considered rape. In most other countries you need to use force or perhaps blackmail for it to be classified as rape. If you have sex with a heavily drunk or passed-out woman in UK or US it might not be considered as rape! Is that ok?

What I think has happened is that these women wouldn't have minded having sex with JA as long has he used a condom. For one reason or another, the condom broke or was not available. Then, they were not interested in sex with JA anymore. Even if they were at first positive to sex, if JA now forces himself upon them, he commits rape. Is that strange?

I don't get this . . If there is a ridiculous "law" that's not recognized elsewhere, how can it be enforced? What if the object of the law, some dusted off antiquated legalism, real purpose was to legitimize and subjugate people who practice a particular religion or political persuasion - would that charge be OK too? With all the rhetoric around the release of sensitive documents it boggles the mind that substantial indictments haven't come to the fore. Maybe some of these political dummies should be exposed --- for stupidity.

Please Enable Javascript for this Oil Price widget to workPlease Enable Javascript for this Oil Price widget to workPlease Enable Javascript for this Oil Price widget to workPlease Enable Javascript for this Oil Price widget to workPlease Enable Javascript for this Oil Price widget to workPlease Enable Javascript for this Oil Price widget to workPlease Enable Javascript for this Oil Price widget to work